500channelsurfer

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64874821 Scotland's pro-independence party and government have a new leader named Humza Yousaf. He speaks with the accent of a typical worldly Scot, is a seasoned politician and has jumped many political hurdles. He will head, for the moment, a coalition with the Greens. His baggage includes criticisms that occurred almost universally during Covid to cabinet ministers heading equivalent departments in the Western world. He reminds me of Quebec during the late 1990s, when progressive and pro-sovereigntist governments lead with great fanfare to little achievement. History most often repeats, but accumulation of small conditional changes lead up to making history.

If you own land/property or are in the process of owning it (mortgage) you either likely consider the financial industry and easy facilitation of financial transactions important for your mortgage, or for investments if you are mortgage-free (parties more on the right). Farmers are typically land owners and also typically vote right, and particulars of right-wing parties such as the PPC's anti-supply management policy cater to certain farmers. Generally, the agriculture industry and lobbies are tied to right-wing parties. The right broadly is more law-enforcement oriented (protection of private property) whereas extreme leftists are more associated with redistribution. Liberals have made significant policy moves to encourage home-ownership through new first-time-buyer incentives.

The riding is increasingly populated by young urban professionals. Younger Quebekers as a whole have less attachment to Canada as previous generations, but they also have less of the zealous need for independence as did the first generation of Parti-Québecois. At the moment due to Liberal Party of Quebec being in interim leader status and federal Liberals becoming long-in-the-tooth with Trudeau, gravitation to the other parties occurs.

This thread has missed that in recent times, historically, since the Industrial Revolution, and in democracies, rural peoples tend to be more land-owning; and urban areas tend to have a much higher proportion of renters. Land owners overall will naturally favour political parties and platforms that cater to land and property ownership rights. Renters overall will naturally favour political parties and platforms that cater to government intervention to maintain lower prices and good upkeep of their dwellings, subsidize added urban costs such as sidewalks, municipal water and sewage, and the more complex transportation infrastructure requirements of cities. This is of course very basic and overly generalized. Political culture plays the part of explaining the outliers to this generalization, as explanations do exist for why certain suburbs always vote Liberal rather than Conservative, and certain rural ridings NDP. Historical traditions and values including religion, revered past party leaders and corporatism (the issues and lobby groups a political party is associated with) are the most common reasons.

Why is the West fighting this war DUMB? Is it normal to advise everyone including the enemy the exact number of tanks that will be coming, with their exact specifications, expected arrival date, likely point of entry, and expected training time required once they arrive in Ukraine? Is it logical to send a small number of technologically superior tanks to face off against a much larger number of Russian tanks, when this is exactly what Hitler did in order to lose the Battle of Kursk? Is it strategically intelligent to bleed military stockpiles into Europe without any plan to at least replace them, while a Pacific power's military is growing by leaps and bounds?

Culturally, the vast majority of voters vote for party and leader over local candidate whether PR or FPTP. With PR, there is even less local control, and candidates are even more tied to party leaders while ridings have even less attachment to their local candidates. The "pizza pie" parliaments in Europe and elsewhere prove PR causes less stable governments and more gridlock. However, the FPTP system causes such voting distortions between popular vote and parliamentary representation perhaps we should adopt a multi-member plurality system where second-place candidates also gain a seat in parliament only if the riding vote is close enough. It is also time to replace the Monarchy with the Governor General as Head of State, while leaving it a symbolic role only, except for decision to dissolve Parliament and call an election vs. appoint other coalition or whatnot. Maybe the GG could also be elected and party-affiliated, as long as it is a one-ballot deal at the same time as general elections. No mathematical-formula based elections that cause wasted time and money and weeks of each side campaigning in runoffs that destabilize the country, as we see in Brazil and France.

The health care system is broken because the education system is broken. The only long-term solution is to expand the number of educational opportunities to become doctors and nurses. In the 1990s governments cut back on education spots for doctor and nurse education as a short-term measure to ease budgets. Canada should not have to rely on immigrants who are already trained doctors and nurses because our systems make it difficult for them to get their credentials approved, because foreign training always requires some level of adaptation to Canada, and because Canada has a pool of would-be qualified Canadian young people perfectly capable of becoming doctors and nurses if the educational opportunities were there and the professions were attractive. The understaffing in our health care system is driving young Canadians who might have chosen to become a doctor or a nurse to pursue other careers like lawyer or engineer, because the working conditions in health care are terrible. No other field enforces mandatory overtime on their workers after six years, or whatever it is now, university education. So if the government would fund more medical schools and positions, Canadians would see that working conditions in the medical field will improve long-term and more people will have the chance and opportunity to choose a medical career while career prospects are improving. In the meantime, hiring foreign workers and optimizing the systems that we have will have to do.

Dominique Anglade has resigned her seat, and there will be a bi-election called this winter or spring by Premier Francois Legault in her Montreal riding. If the Quebec Liberals do not show strong leadership, this could be a gain for QS, or even Legault's CAQ. Bi-election turnout is normally abysmal, so this will be a test of loyalty for all parties.

Yes, Canada is a civilized place. And also yes, the tribes of Europe have warred on and off for thousands of years. Most of these are short-lived conflicts but occasionally erupt into much larger ones. Since tribes have more formalized into nation-states, wars have become both less frequent but also more intense. Tribalism is an aspect of humanity that also pre-dates human arrival into Europe. Canada's big picture is one where governments are able to be elected by and be supported by multiple tribes, and so we have a normally prosperous and peaceful country unlike the fragmentations elsewhere. Just like many forces of history, good can be the product of many intentions including non-good ones.

I am sorry to say that Zelensy's peace plan is too demanding. If tanks are flowing into Belarus from Russia, Putin may be preparing for another attack front in the case of a Russian rejection of peace negotiations. Zelensky peace plan: https://www.businessinsider.com/zelenskyy-proposes-10-point-peace-plan-ukraine-g20-bali-summit-2022-11 The Crimea has been under Russia for 8 years now; does Zelensky really expect Russia to hand it back over as well as Russian speaking and ethnic regions in Ukraine's far east? Or are these bargaining chips? The world was much safer when there were buffer states between more powerful ones.

The United States was founded and constitution written with violence in mind. The federal government was intended simply to defend its member independent states from British and future oppression and invading forces. Canadian independence happened almost reluctantly. We only brought home our constitution in 1982. We never went to war for it and it only exists as a series of assumed accepted precedents, with referendums to better formalize and change it always failing. The nations of Europe have national identities dating back a thousand year or more so their citizens are much more easily made to feel strongly for their 'tribe.'

Brazil is a bicameral legislative republic much like the United States. This presidential election result by itself is largely symbolic. Without the support of at least some of the legislature, the office of the president is almost as powerless as the Governor General of Canada. Bolsonaro's Liberal party still has more seats in Brazil's Senate and Chamber of Deputies than Lula's Workers' Party does. To compare, say Trump won 100% of the presidential vote, but the Democrats had every Congressperson; despite having the official title of President, Trump would have less actual power than Nancy Pelosi. Lula as president this time around will be a weak presidency as he will require multiple parties in both the Senate and Chamber of Deputies ' approvals for any proposals he intends to pass through. But hey, Presidential elections alone are what grabs the headlines.

I believe you, but please post some sources, because the media is not reporting this point of view.

https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/marie-claude-nichols-expelled-from-que-liberal-caucus-will-sit-as-independent-1.6127743 Marie-Claude Nichols expelled from Que. Liberal caucus, will sit as independent The Quebec Liberal Party may be in the midst of self-destruction here. One can only imagine the toxicity inside a party where MLAs are expulsed from or leave the party before the legislature even re-convenes after an election. August1991, you stated the Liberals are now the "Anglo party" and of course that is true, but unfortunately for the Anglade Liberals that is only true because their support comes solely from the most Anglo ridings of Quebec. The Anglade Liberals cannot expand their base beyond this by being the "Anglo party" because they have already won all the Anglo ridings. Anglade is not Anglo and does not market herself as an Anglo rights activist whatsoever. The MPs elected are also largely non-Anglo and largely not necessarily Anglo-rights. Anglo voters need only the chance to jump ship to another party that has a chance at some power and they will change their votes in droves. Remember the Equality Party? ------- In the recent Quebec election apparently the Québecois decided en masse they simply wanted a French-language nationalist who has demonstrated himself as largely non-ideological, capable of shifting policy with the wind, and has come off looking good from the pandemic, only comparatively (against Covid-disaster associated politicians).

The Wildrose is in